Are the words of Jesus still meant for Christians?

[St. SteVen]

In practical terms, I think this is what it means to follow Jesus.
The advice about how to live, Turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, settle out of court, et all.

@Episkopos
I think we also need to consider the fact that moral teachings are not unique to Christianity, or Christ.
Judaism, the religions of the far east, and even Islam, to some degree, all have moral teachings.
In fact the Muslims, especially the women, seem happier to me than most Christians.

So, there must be MORE to following Christ than moral teachings. All religions have that.

 

[Nancy]

Great questions. Very interesting post.
I'll probably take some heat for my replies.


The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.
Based on that statement most claim that Jesus WAS the Word.
Which seems like a hasty conclusion to me.

What, or whom, was the Word/Logos before it/he became flesh.

Prior to being made flesh among us.
But, was that Jesus?
I would say, not UNTIL he/it became flesh.

"The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." - Acts 11:26 NIV

Not by today's definition. Can be social, religious, or political.

I assume this would be a different definition than in John chapter one.
Some call an English translation of the Bible, of which none agree, "the Word of God".

When heaven and earth pass away?

"What, or whom, was the Word/Logos before it/he became flesh."

"I Am that I Am"?


"Prior to being made flesh among us.
But, was that Jesus?
I would say, not UNTIL he/it became flesh."


Jesus put on human flesh, but He Himself is eternal, just as His Father has no beginning nor end! That's still WOW to me
Also, He is the Alpha and the Omega...the beginning of time and the end of time. Doesn't mean that Christ Himself is limited by "time" at all, just the creation.

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."
Genesis 1:3

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters."
Genesis 1:6

John 5:30
"I can do nothing by Myself; I judge only as I hear. And My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me."
John 5:30

So can this also be a conclusion? That God The Father speaks, and The Son does?

There are other verses too, but this is long enough. These are only my understandings.

 

[St. SteVen]

Jesus put on human flesh, but He Himself is eternal, just as His Father has no beginning nor end! That's still WOW to me

Good post, thanks.
It is a standard doctrine of the church that Jesus was pre-existent. As I understand it.
Of course, I can't leave well enough alone... - LOL

So I ask, what was his pre-existent purpose before the need for a savior to come to earth?
Was the Father really a father before the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason became flesh? (a son)
Likewise, was the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason a person before it/he became flesh?

 

[amadeus]

Great questions. Very interesting post.
I'll probably take some heat for my replies.


The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.
Based on that statement most claim that Jesus WAS the Word.
Which seems like a hasty conclusion to me.

What, or whom, was the Word/Logos before it/he became flesh.

Prior to being made flesh among us.
But, was that Jesus?
I would say, not UNTIL he/it became flesh.

"The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." - Acts 11:26 NIV

Not by today's definition. Can be social, religious, or political.

I assume this would be a different definition than in John chapter one.
Some call an English translation of the Bible, of which none agree, "the Word of God".

When heaven and earth pass away?

Will the apparently logical answers to the questions I expressed assure us of permanent place with God. In other words, can our minds alone encounter God or do we need faith and God's help? If we do have faith in God and His Son do we need to have all the correct answers to those questions as well? What does God desire of us? What does God require of us in order to always be with Him?

 

[Episkopos]

Good post, thanks.
It is a standard doctrine of the church that Jesus was pre-existent. As I understand it.
Of course, I can't leave well enough alone... - LOL

So I ask, what was his pre-existent purpose before the need for a savior to come to earth?

Jesus, as Yahweh, was co-creator with His Father...the Most High...also called Yahweh. Hence the confusion. Jesus was given Jacob for His inheritance. (As in...I am the God of Isaac and Jacob). The way the bible is written puts Jesus as being IN God...but lesser...although of the same name and character. They are One Spirit together.

Was the Father really a father before the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason became flesh? (a son)

Yes. The "today I have begotten you" speaks of a time before creation.

Likewise, was the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason a person before it/he became flesh?

Yes. The God of Israel. The Father is the God of the universe. Jesus was the king of the Jews. Now He is over all creation.

Notice this...

Deut. 32:8 When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. (The Septuagint says the sons of God)

9 For the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.


The Most High (The Father) gave Jacob to His Son as an inheritance. Jacob is Israel. Israel is wed to Jesus. And the nations of them that are saved are invited to the wedding feast. (Israel here is spiritual Israel).

 

[Episkopos]

@Episkopos
I think we also need to consider the fact that moral teachings are not unique to Christianity, or Christ.
Judaism, the religions of the far east, and even Islam, to some degree, all have moral teachings.
In fact the Muslims, especially the women, seem happier to me than most Christians.

So, there must be MORE to following Christ than moral teachings. All religions have that.

Agreed. Confucius AND Socrates both posited that we are to treat others as ourselves. All people will be judged against that universal standard. All who fear God and do what is right will be accepted by God. Peter says as much.

Christianity is the new and living way that is according to holiness IN Christ. To walk as He walked...in His resurrection power over all sin. It is to walk in His love, life, and power. This is the way of the Bride of Christ. It is the way of the chosen ones...the Israel of God.

 

[St. SteVen]

Will the apparently logical answers to the questions I expressed assure us of permanent place with God. In other words, can our minds alone encounter God or do we need faith and God's help? If we do have faith in God and His Son do we need to have all the correct answers to those questions as well? What does God desire of us? What does God require of us in order to always be with Him?

Your questions were pretty deep. Only a childlike faith is required.

 

[St. SteVen]

Jesus, as Yahweh, was co-creator with His Father...the Most High...also called Yahweh. Hence the confusion.

Reminds me of the Bob Newhart TV show.
"This is my brother Darrell, and this is my other brother Darrell."

 

[CadyandZoe]

What say you?

Why would someone even ask the question? What's the point being made here? Why would a bona fide Christian set Paul against Jesus?

 

[Lambano]

Why would someone even ask the question? What's the point being made here? Why would a bona fide Christian set Paul against Jesus?

Having spent about a dozen years on a site sponsored by a Reformed ministry, I think I understand why the question needs to be asked. As I said earlier, Protestant theology (especially justification by faith) is based primarily on the Pauline writings, and Paul is more concerned about the meaning of Messiah's death and resurrection in the context of Israel's story and Creation's metanarrative. Big picture guy. Only two references to Jesus's actual teaching. As an aside, I suspect he gave his travelling companion Dr. Luke the assignment of researching the details of Jesus's life and teaching. But I'll never be able to verify that this side of Kingdom come.

What I observed on that site was a mindset that, because Jesus intensified certain aspects of Torah ("You have heard it said.... but I say to you...", e.g. it's not enough to not bed a woman other than your wife, you can't even look at her with sexual desire; see Mount, comma, Sermon On), this was interpreted as Jesus making sure we understood that we cannot be justified by keeping Torah. This promotes the concept that says Jesus's teachings are irrelevant; the only thing that matters is the crucifixion. "Shaddup already about counting the cost and denying myself and get up on that cross and atone for my sins, please." Even the Resurrection was just a nice happy ending to the story, but not as important as the Atonement. Blecch. Yeah, I found people really think that way. Jesus's teachings were just another set of "Law" that we don't have to follow. We only have to have "faith", which usually meant "belief in the doctrine of justification by faith".

Me, learned to understand "faith" as "trust". Trust in a person, not a doctrine, though doctrine informs me about the One I must trust and what He wants from me. Relating to Jesus as a person, not just as an event in a metanarrative. Which makes Jesus's teachings important (even if I'm not doing a good job following them).

 

[St. SteVen]

Jesus intensified certain aspects of Torah ("You have heard it said.... but I say to you...", e.g.

I take that as Jesus treating the law as hearsay.
A very strange way to talk about the law if you are attempting to exalt it. (the law)

 

[Lambano]

Likewise, was the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason a person before it/he became flesh?

Or the Wisdom in Proverbs 8:22-31 that preceded the Creation of the world?

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Likewise, was the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason a person before it/he became flesh?

Or the Wisdom in Proverbs 8:22-31 that preceded the Creation of the world?

That's interesting.
Seems to support my reading of Logos as "Word/Logos/Logic/Reason". Wisdom would fit.

 

[Episkopos]

Why would someone even ask the question? What's the point being made here? Why would a bona fide Christian set Paul against Jesus?

Many would. Most won't come right out and say things like...Jesus was only speaking to Jews...or things like that....that what Jesus said was not meant for us today. Things like that...on this very forum.

If we were to go by influence, then far more believers ignore the sayings of Jesus for what they think Paul is saying.

An example is this...What must I do to be saved? Jesus says...obey the commandments. Paul says...you must believe in Jesus.

If someone sees a discrepancy there...which will he do? Both? Will he love God and believe in Jesus AND also obey the commandment to love others???? Or will one be set against the other?

Was Jesus telling us the truth that salvation depends on obeying the commandments?

 

[Cassandra]

Why would someone even ask the question? What's the point being made here? Why would a bona fide Christian set Paul against Jesus?

Yes!!
That is my question, too. There can't be any "set against" can there? If we think there is, maybe we need to study more to bring things together.

Perhaps some eyesalve? We could all use some.

 

[Episkopos]

St. SteVen said:
Likewise, was the Word/Logos/Logic/Reason a person before it/he became flesh?

That's interesting.
Seems to support my reading of Logos as "Word/Logos/Logic/Reason". Wisdom would fit.

Or else the word made flesh is a name... Youd Hey Vav Heh...or "Behold a hand, behold a nail" Or as the Jews say..."Hashem" (the name)

Before Abraham was...He is.

 

[Episkopos]

I take that as Jesus treating the law as hearsay.
A very strange way to talk about the law if you are attempting to exalt it. (the law)

We could do the same thing today with the way Paul is being interpreted to say.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Many would. Most won't come right out and say things like...Jesus was only speaking to Jews...or things like that....that what Jesus said was not meant for us today. Things like that...on this very forum.

If we were to go by influence, then far more believers ignore the sayings of Jesus for what they think Paul is saying.

An example is this...What must I do to be saved? Jesus says...obey the commandments. Paul says...you must believe in Jesus.

If someone sees a discrepancy there...which will he do? Both? Will he love God and believe in Jesus AND also obey the commandment to love others???? Or will one be set against the other?

Was Jesus telling us the truth that salvation depends on obeying the commandments?

As followers of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles, we must recognize the importance of context in interpreting the Bible. The saying "context is king" emphasizes this crucial aspect of understanding any given text. For instance, when Jesus spoke about the importance of keeping the commandments for salvation, we must consider the immediate audience, the current situation, the Jewish culture, and the background to fully grasp his message. By taking the context into account, we can see that Jesus and Paul share a unified perspective on many issues.

 

[St. SteVen]

An example is this...What must I do to be saved? Jesus says...obey the commandments. Paul says...you must believe in Jesus.

Uh oh. I don't think that was what Jesus commanded.
I think Jesus was working the rich young ruler through a process.
He asked, "What does the law say?" And replied, "Do this and you will live." (no one can)
The punchline was that the rich young ruler (and all of Judaism) was missing something.
And it wasn't commandment keeping. IMHO

 

[St. SteVen]

We could do the same thing today with the way Paul is being interpreted to say.

Do you mean about the law?

Galatians 2:21 NIV
I do not set aside the grace of God,
for if righteousness could be gained through the law,
Christ died for nothing!”[a]

Galatians 5:4 NIV
You who are trying to be justified by the law have been
alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.